Mazda 626 1999 vs Citroen C5 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 138 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 2 HP less power than Citroen C5, whereas torque is 12 NM less than Citroen C5. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C5, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 3 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 3 cm shorter than the Citroen C5, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 456 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 626 has 46 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C5. The Citroen C5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 1 metres less than that of the Citroen C5, which means Mazda 626 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`845 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Citroen C5 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 626, so Citroen C5 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Citroen C5 has
| |